Sarbanes-oxley Act, is it Too Costly?

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed in 2002 and isindustry to go after untapped resources – one of
also known as the Public Company Accountingwhich is women who may have recently left work, or
Reform and Investor Protection Act of 2002. It iswho are contemplating leaving the workforce, to have
called the Sarbanes-Oxley Act after Senators Paula family. More firms are now offering flexible work
Sarbanes (D-Md) and Michael Oxley (R-Oh). Thearragements to accomdate the needs of this
legislation introduced major changes to the regulationgroup”(Boodoo, 2007).
of financial practice and corporate governance ( AnIt also says “the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has provided
argument against the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is that itcorporate boards an incentive to seek diverse
may be too costly. Some would argue that it doesdirectors who are people of color and women”
more economic harm than economic good. The Act(Boodoo, 2007).
established the Public Company Accounting OversightThis all raises the question is this too costly? According
Board, which is charged with overseeing, regulating,to Sean Nolan in his article, “Planner: Calculating
inspecting, and disciplining accounting firms in their rolesCosts of Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance”, AMR
as auditors of public.Research estimates that Fortune 1000 companies will
As many know, Enron was a company based inspend $2.5 billion on Sarbanes-Oxley compliance this
Houston, Texas. They filed for bankruptcy after it wasyear. The opportunity cost is something that must be
revealed that its reported financial condition wasthought of here. Is it more important to save money by
comprised of creative accounting fraud. This eventnot complying with Sarbanes-Oxley, or is it more
destroyed many people’s lives. Employees lost allimportant to protect people from accounting fraud
they put into the company. This is one of the eventsamong many other things Sarbanes-Oxley protects
that made the US Congress implement theagainst? Obviously the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is a very
Sarbanes-Oxley Act to protect companies fromimportant law enforced by US Congress. It protects
performing accounting scandals.people from being put into horrible situations such as
Maria and Crystal Boodoo’s article “Peering intoEnron or WorldCom. The positive outcomes of this
the Fog The Emerging Consequences oflaw greatly outweigh the negative outcomes.
Sarbanes-Oxley”, begins by talking about howCompany owners are losing money by following the
costly the Act actually is for companies. Ther articleact, but I feel the US society really needs this act. No
says, “Companies required an average of 22,786one, at any cost, should have to go through what
people hours internally to complay withemployees and shareholders of Enron and WorldCom.
[Sarbanes-Oxley] in 2005” (Boodoo, 2007). ThePeople lost their savings and their money because
article also said, to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley majorCEO’s and accountants of a company decided to
corporations spent about $3.8 million in 2006. Not toskim money and lie to shareholders. While I agree that
mention opportunity costs of management which isnot everyone should have to pay for the mistakes
now distracted (Boodoo, 2007). However, with allmade by Enron or WorldCom, it is important this Act
these costs the article states, “The costs ofstill be implemented because they have tarnished the
Sarbanes-Oxley are very real and tangible, but thenames of accountants. Since the Act is preventing
potential benefits that may be materializing are oftenpeople from skimming money off of companies it must
intangible and societal in nature” (Boodoo, 2007).be kept in order. Also, if the company is opening up
This quote is very true, it may cost companies money,jobs for people of color and women it is important.
but it is important for society as a whole to beDiversity in the workplace is an important part of the
protected from scandals like Enron and WorldCom.future. Also, since it fights against corruption, money
The article also goes on to say, “Sarbanes-Oxley islaundering, and terrorist financing, it is clearly important.
not what motivates investors to enter the stockThese illegal things should be put to rest, and anything
market. But it is possible that without Sarbanes-Oxley,companies can do to make sure of it would be really
more people could have stayed away fromimportant. It is also a plus for stockholders. More people
investing….The symbolic act of Sarbanes-Oxley mayare investing in companies with the confidence that
have helped to quell public concerns” (Boodoo,something like Enron or WorldCom won’t happen.
2007). Sarbanes-Oxley also helps in the fight ofBasically, regardless of how costly the
corruption and money laundering. The article says,Sarbanes-Oxley Act is, it is an important part of
“Through Sarbanes-Oxley, companies haveAmerican coporations now.
become a first line of defense against major illegalWorks Cited
activity, such as bribery, money laundering, and terroristBoodoo, Maria F. and Crystal F. (2007). Peering into the
financing” (Boodoo, 2007). The article goes on toFog The Emerging
talk about how orginally people thought theConsequences of Sarbanes-Oxley. Pennsylvania CPA
Sarbanes-Oxley Act would put stress onJournal. 78(1), 36-39.
company’s staffs. The article however says,Nolan, Sean (2003). “Planner: Calculating Costs of
“The supply gap in experience auditors andSarbanes-Oxley Compliance”
accountants, accentuated by the compliance demandsRetrieved 4/28/08.
of the Act, is prompting public accounting firms and